AnUser
#101
The context was about increasing awareness of longevity science.
1 Like
My introduction to longevity science was through Sinclairâs book so I am grateful to him for that.
4 Likes
No question⊠David Sinclair has done many good things too. That book is something that got me back into the field after having dismissed it for a decade ⊠ironically, because of lack of progress and excess hype.
I eventually caught up on all the research on NMN and decided it wasnât worth it. And moved on to rapamycin as the data was so much better.
6 Likes
I enjoy your posts and appreciate your participation here. When it comes to vaccines I think Iâll have to respectfully disagree; of course, I live in San Francisco so you should expect that 
But lets not turn this into a political discussion as we have so much here that we have in common!
More broadly, I donât think the vaccine hesitancy is really a result of significant issues with the science of the vaccines (in this discussion I think youâre talking about Covid). If that were the case, youâd think youâd see more vaccine hesitancy in the more medically and scientifically educated people. Instead, the vaccine hesitancy mirrors the same general rural / urban divide that we see in life expectancy, BMI, etc.
'Nuff said 
5 Likes
Kaki14
#105
Good for you to see the wizard behind the curtain - for what they are. I left a good career in biotech/ biomedical instruments in the Boston area after a huge bigwig scientist my husband ( full ride Howard Hughes scholarship at Harvard med ) And I followed published a paper with outright lies against commonly known facts. We knew someone got to him. Shortly afterwards Fauci at NIH gave him humongous grant and he started Millenium. Right then I knew the field I so proudly entered as a female biochemist had abandoned Truth for government agenda.
Sending blessings to you for standing for the Truth.
3 Likes
ng0rge
#106
Follow the money. Politicians and government agenda are just as corruptible (generally more so) as scientists (re:Sinclair). In fact with really all media implicated, itâs really hard to know who to trust.
2 Likes
Bicep
#107
Holy moly my life expectancy is 86. Donât know if I can do it. The pressure is on.
My neighbor that farmed until he was 96 has bladder cancer and took the year off. My son bought from him a 1981 volkswagon rabbit diesel pickup truck last week. It died 25 years ago when the timing belt snapped and has been shedded since (amazing find). When itâs finished we should do a photo with that one and @Agetron 's car. It would demonstrate the diversity we enjoy on this site in spite of common interest.
9 Likes
Agetron
#108
In another month, when the weather is a little bit warmer, Iâll put it down the top and come up and visit you and see how that volkswagen is looking.
But youâre right. We all come in all different shapes and sizes⊠phenotypes
And each ages uniquely, which is why I think rapamycin does so many different tepairs to so many different people. But never quite the same thing twice in the same way with those dosing, perhaps.
2 Likes
ng0rge
#109
Much as the coastal elites (no offense @RapAdmin ) like to make fun of the Heartland (no offense @Bicep & @Agetron) some of my heroes are from middle America. Since basketball is my sport and letâs face it (not being racist) whiteâs are kinda defying expectations when they achieve great success - and who doesnât love an underdog. I generally judge all players just on their skill levelâŠbut players like Larry Bird and now, Caitlin Clark (both mid-westerners) just donât look like they should be any good. Even one of @RapAdmin 's heroes, Rich Miller is at U of M (not that Ann Arbor is representative). So I have to admit, even if youâre from the mid-west, you just might be OK.
Edit: besides they sometimes appear to be speaking in their own language⊠using words like âtepairsâ and âquiettheâ (@Agetron ). I donât know what theyâre sayingâŠbut itâs charming .
3 Likes
Watch todayâs youtube from Dr. Brad Stanfield and youâll see some interesting controversy involving David Sinclair. I always wondered about the sale of Sinclairâs company to GSK for $720 million dollars for what turned out to be a worthless âdiscoveryâ. Stanfield presents a compelling case.
4 Likes
José
#111
And Sinclair and the rest of the Founders and investors took profits.
More like professional jealousy.
You can speak about Sinclairâs down side, in the end the facts are he has published papers, has a premier Laboratory, and re$ource$.
Stanfield can not raise $500,000 for a small study( in my view a worthless study yes some people do not like my comments)
I have nothing to prove to anyone.
1 Like
Davin8r
#112
Actually he has raised the money, and the study is planned to get under way this Summer. The âjealousyâ assertion just sounds like an attempt to distract and avoid dealing with the facts in the video.
3 Likes
José
#113
âWe need to raise a total of $USD 492,177.69 and have raised $99,433.97 so far.â
I stand by my comment.
$500,000 For a âpropose 13-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 2a Proof of concept trial of 40 participants, with 20 in the placebo arm and 20 in the Sirolimus (Rapamycin) arm.â
The ITP studies at multiple locations do not cost $500,000 per study
1 Like
I have been following Sinclair for years. He is an excellent speaker who always made the subjects interesting. But I grew disillusioned with him and his teachings when I took a look at his history. He sold his red wine cure (reservatrol) to GSK for 3/4 billion. They shut it down a couple of years later because it did not work. They lost all there investment. You needed to drink 20 bottles of wine a day to see any benefit. Same thing happened with NMN a Brighams and Womens Hospital in Boston. It increased NAD in blood, but not in the cell which is where it is made. Again another failure, but company sold a lot of product. Now reversal of ageing in dogs without any real proof, but selling the product anyway. I feel he knew that all these would not deliver what they promised before hand, but still would make money. Dr. Brenner of Chromax (NR) fame is also dishonest.
5 Likes
Neo
#115
Can hi in share more on this please
Davin8r
#116
He made an announcement to supporters a while ago that enough money had been raised to start the study. Enrollment is scheduled for May 2024. Either way, completely irrelevant to Sinclair. Just an attempt to shoot the messenger.
3 Likes
Did you watch the video?
It is a fact that GSK shut down the project and took a loss, probably in excess of the $720 million initial purchase price.
Also Matt Kaeberlein alluded that Sinclair is a âsnake oil salesmanâ. Pretty strong words.
I doubt weâve heard the end of this.
4 Likes
KAB001
#118
Matt Kaberleinâs response to the Stanfield video on D.S. and Resveratrol controversy:
https://twitter.com/mkaeberlein/status/1767196994693701707
Just listened to
@bradstanfield
âs video, and while some of the details are off, the general theme is accurate. Given that I already know this story, I was still struck when
@davidasinclair
lies publicly about his research (starting at ~8:10) on
@PeterAttiaMD
's podcast. Frankly, this pattern of behavior is why I, and many of my colleagues, donât trust anything that comes out of the Sinclair lab.
6 Likes
I totally agree with you. His public prominence means that he has a responsibility to hold himself to a higher standard. He has failed to do that, instead aligning with the money.
2 Likes
To me it doesnât matter what motivations are going on inside his mind. What matters is can I trust what he tells me without wasting an inordinate amount of time validating his statements.
Now me the answer is NO⊠I have no trust in his statements. So, I will invest my time paying more attention to those that have shown more due diligence and integrity.
3 Likes
